Ron Paul Awesome on the Daily Show

Thank you so much Cujo for posting the link to the interview!!! Yay!!!

RP was great, and so was Jon Stewart for hosting him!
 
ARealConservative said:
Agreed. He needs to deflect it; Let states decide on those issues. Then elect the best federal politicians based on their ability to defend our country and our liberties. Explain how ever increasing government spending gave rise to the lobbyist industry and is actively undermining their ability to accomplish what they want anyway.
Click to expand...

Yes but at least in the short term this shouldn't hurt him with Conservatives in the race for the GOP nomination...
 
joenaab said:
on the subject of cutting medicare and other social programs, couldn't RP's position be two-fold:

1. Private companies always do things better than the govt.
2. Its better for the States to handle these things, from education to health care to care for the elderly, in a manner decided by the people of that state

I think a fear for the elderly would be that private enterprise would leave without care. Doesn't a constitutionalist position allow for the states to innovate in social services (or not, should they choose not to)?
Click to expand...

Well the Constitution does leave a lot of discretion to the states, but in the end I still think government welfare at any level is unconstitutional because it necessarily violates the right of property through coercive taxation. I don't think RP is going to use the Federal government to shut down state welfare programs, however, if he is elected President. Furthermore, there is a natural incentive for States to keep welfare and taxation to a minimum, if the Federal government leaves them alone on the issue. They have to compete with other states, so if one state has massive taxes and welfare then they lose businesses and enterpeneuers while all of the welfare-recipients flood in. The principle of competition comes into play at the state level, whereas with the Federal government doing it nation-wide you dont' have this.

The message to liberals is this: Your intentions are good, your goals and your compassion are good...

Let's just find ways to accomplish them without using the force, waste and inefficiency of government. Why not form a private cooperative unemployment insurance company and enter into it voluntarily? This way the free market keeps the rates low and the services good. This way people still have the all-important (to liberals) "safety-net" but you got it without having to use coercive force (which government is). You probably get it a lot cheaper in the long run too.

Let's face it, if government programs were so wonderful and worthwile, people would invest in them voluntarily. The only reason they need to be taxed and mandated is because they SUCK!
 
Last edited:
Swmorgan77 said:
Let's face it, if government programs were so wonderful and worthwile, people would invest in them voluntarily. The only reason they need to be taxed and mandated is because they SUCK!
Click to expand...

That's what it all boils down to. Great comment!
 
I thought it was great and Jon was cracking me up...definitely makes me want to watch him more. I'm going to email him and thank him. Ron was absolutely wonderful!! I was rolling when he didn't hear Jon and got up and left.
 
Last edited:
RP could have been a little stronger. I think he's nervous and needs to relax...he got a lot of soft balls from Stewart that he could have hit further.

Like his line about "nothing wrong with people making money...even entertainers..."

Crowd was great...thanks to the RP supporters that went!!
 
joenaab said:
on the subject of cutting medicare and other social programs, couldn't RP's position be two-fold:

1. Private companies always do things better than the govt.
2. Its better for the States to handle these things, from education to health care to care for the elderly, in a manner decided by the people of that state
Click to expand...

The whole problem with that is simply that the Democrats don't believe that the "evil corporations" actually do things better than government. They don't like corporations because they make profits, and in their perception, those profits come from stupid customers and abused employees.

I have found that it's tough to convince people that it's a bad program, because they do not care how much it costs or how wasteful it is as long as Grandma gets her to see her MD.
 
RP doesn't really take a strong stance on abolishing welfare programs, though. As he said, its not high on his agenda, and he'd never get the congressional support to do it. So I don't see what the issue is.
 
Right ... it's all about what the executive branch can do. Abolishing legislation isn't really possible, at least outright. Shutting down LOTS of bad agencies surely is possible . . . and of course stopping the war. But the biggest benefit is the constant airplay - to get the Message out.
 
Swmorgan77 said:
Furthermore, there is a natural incentive for States to keep welfare and taxation to a minimum, if the Federal government leaves them alone on the issue. They have to compete with other states, so if one state has massive taxes and welfare then they lose businesses and enterpeneuers while all of the welfare-recipients flood in. The principle of competition comes into play at the state level, whereas with the Federal government doing it nation-wide you dont' have this.
Click to expand...

This is a big part of what I'm talking about. An explosion of innovation that will begin when authority is transferred from federal to state. I put this in an earlier post in this thread when I was trying to enumerate "talking points" for handling questions about reducing social welfare programs.

There are two points I'm trying to separate, one is the theory/argument as to private versus public and the other is the marketing aspect of campaigning and how his answers to these questions need to be packaged in a way that is sellable to voters, while still being honest.

In some ways, the "deferring to the states" is going to be a great response to tough questions. He uses this every time he is asked about abortion, for example.

We are trying to get him elected and this is a way to attract even the most liberal of democrats and socialist leaning people. Tell them that they will have a greater voice and more freedom to innovate at the state level.
 
I'm waking up to e-mail from a lot of friends who, on my request, watched the Daily Show and saw Ron Paul speak for the first time in their lives and they all loved him (like someone couldn't!). They are a diverse group, too. One owns a large financial investment firm in San Diego and several of them write sitcoms in Los Angeles.
 
Last edited:
joenaab said:
on the subject of cutting medicare and other social programs, couldn't RP's position be two-fold:

1. Private companies always do things better than the govt.
2. Its better for the States to handle these things, from education to health care to care for the elderly, in a manner decided by the people of that state

I think a fear for the elderly would be that private enterprise would leave without care. Doesn't a constitutionalist position allow for the states to innovate in social services (or not, should they choose not to)?
Click to expand...

Yes, states can and in some cases to have medical benefits for the elderly. He took a strong position in my view in that he said ending government Medicare is not his highest priority and that there would of course be a transition period because people have been taught for almost 80 years that they should be dependent on government for every want and need. Since he comes off as genuinely friendly, it will be a lot harder to paint him as the ultra meanie who wants old people to drop dead. And frankly, his presentation of his views is much better than how others have attempted in the past.

I think it was a very strong showing for him and while the deck is clearly being stacked against him in this debate (with his podium at the very end), I still think he will do well this evening.
 
Erazmus said:
If you like Jon Steward, I recommend watching this...

Part 1 of the John Stewart Interview on Bill Moyers Journal

It really impressed me. Jon Stewart really is a very intelligent man.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I saw that interview. Bill kept trying to get Jon to admit that there's more going on with the daily show than just comedy and that he does more to progress news journalism than many "real" journalists, but Jon, ever so modest, absolutely wouldn't accept that idea.
 
Daily Show interview

Everytime there's a Ron Paul interview, I have to wait till next day to catch it because of the time difference here in the UK!

So I just rushed back from work to catch the interview and the crowds outside

And it went pretty well didn't it!!!!

A good interview...always too short...but good none the less, and plenty of support outside too. Wish I was there! I would definitely get involved in the action
 
SCRIBBLER
Is that sign in connecticut really there? I went to your my space page and had the best laugh! birthplace of dubya and they actually apologize! Sure tells it all. I tried sending email to others on the link. An error pops up and disconnects me. Also can't print it out.
 
joined

got my registration but link in email would not take me into your site. Is this because of firefox?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Voluntarist
Weird Pinocchio Cross
Replies
0
Views
43
Voluntarist
Voluntarist
Occam's Banana
  • Featured
The Battle for the Right: America First or No?
2
Replies
23
Views
278
acptulsa
acptulsa
Occam's Banana
Michael Malice interviews John Bryan, a.k.a. "The Civil Rights Lawyer"
Replies
0
Views
19
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Brian4Liberty
  • Featured
FULL SPEECH: Tucker on the America First Movement & New “Deplatforming” Agenda of Some on the Right
Replies
9
Views
298
nikcers
nikcers
PAF
Whitney Webb Explains What Trump is Hiding From the Epstein Files
Replies
2
Views
175
unknown
unknown
Back
Top